From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Cc: Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@netfilter.org>,
Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
wenxu <wenxu@ucloud.cn>,
netfilter-devel <netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
coreteam@netfilter.org, Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] netfilter: nf_tables: avoid excessive stack usage
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 20:41:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a04ic_VP6L_=N5P7vfQG1VDV25g3KvUpuCVdX483hx_cA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190907180754.dz7gstqfj7djlbrs@salvia>
On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 8:07 PM Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 05:12:30PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > The nft_offload_ctx structure is much too large to put on the
> > stack:
> >
> > net/netfilter/nf_tables_offload.c:31:23: error: stack frame size of 1200 bytes in function 'nft_flow_rule_create' [-Werror,-Wframe-larger-than=]
> >
> > Use dynamic allocation here, as we do elsewhere in the same
> > function.
> >
> > Fixes: c9626a2cbdb2 ("netfilter: nf_tables: add hardware offload support")
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > ---
> > Since we only really care about two members of the structure, an
> > alternative would be a larger rewrite, but that is probably too
> > late for v5.4.
>
> Thanks for this patch.
>
> I'm attaching a patch to reduce this structure size a bit. Do you
> think this alternative patch is ok until this alternative rewrite
> happens?
I haven't tried it yet, but it looks like that would save 8 of the
48 bytes in each for each of the 24 registers (12 bytes on m68k
or i386, which only use 4 byte alignment for nft_data), so
this wouldn't make too much difference.
> Anyway I agree we should to get this structure away from the
> stack, even after this is still large, so your patch (or a variant of
> it) will be useful sooner than later I think.
What I was thinking for a possible smaller fix would be to not
pass the ctx into the expr->ops->offload callback but
only pass the 'dep' member. Since I've never seen this code
before, I have no idea if that would be an improvement
in the end.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-07 18:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-06 15:12 [PATCH net-next] netfilter: nf_tables: avoid excessive stack usage Arnd Bergmann
2019-09-07 18:07 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2019-09-07 18:41 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2019-09-07 18:52 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAK8P3a04ic_VP6L_=N5P7vfQG1VDV25g3KvUpuCVdX483hx_cA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=jakub.kicinski@netronome.com \
--cc=kadlec@netfilter.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pablo@netfilter.org \
--cc=wenxu@ucloud.cn \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).